We're not going to be bound by the standard Wikipedia "neutrality", but that doesn't mean we're not going to treat issues fairly. Wikipedia has, in a way, fallen prey to what the [[religious right]] would like to do with [[public schools]] and education - competing views get equal time and consideration, even when they don't deserve it.

We're not going to be bound by the standard Wikipedia "neutrality", but that doesn't mean we're not going to treat issues fairly. Wikipedia has, in a way, fallen prey to what the [[religious right]] would like to do with [[public schools]] and education - competing views get equal time and consideration, even when they don't deserve it.

−

We're not just about spouting off competing opinions. We're here to analyze and respond to issues fairly, and often there is no reason to remain neutral. This site will have an inherent bias toward truth, honesty, reason and reality. We will try to fairly present the best examples of opposing arguments if any exist, and listen to [[Christians]] in our forum if an article is lacking something important or unfairly caricaturizing the opposition with [[straw men]].

+

We're not just about spouting off competing opinions. We're here to analyze and respond to issues fairly, and often there is no reason to remain neutral. This site will have an inherent bias toward truth, honesty, reason and reality. We will try to fairly present the best examples of opposing arguments if any exist, and listen to [[Christians]] in our forum if an article is lacking something important or unfairly characterizing the opposition with [[straw men]].

Fixing flawed articles is at the discretion of all members. However, the site admins will make executive decisions on whether an article adheres to our standards or not, and we will be the final arbiters on this matter. Rarely, we will revoke memberships of repeat offenders. Sorry, but if you don't like this position then edit Wikipedia instead of Iron Chariots.

Fixing flawed articles is at the discretion of all members. However, the site admins will make executive decisions on whether an article adheres to our standards or not, and we will be the final arbiters on this matter. Rarely, we will revoke memberships of repeat offenders. Sorry, but if you don't like this position then edit Wikipedia instead of Iron Chariots.

We're not going to be bound by the standard Wikipedia "neutrality", but that doesn't mean we're not going to treat issues fairly. Wikipedia has, in a way, fallen prey to what the religious right would like to do with public schools and education - competing views get equal time and consideration, even when they don't deserve it.

We're not just about spouting off competing opinions. We're here to analyze and respond to issues fairly, and often there is no reason to remain neutral. This site will have an inherent bias toward truth, honesty, reason and reality. We will try to fairly present the best examples of opposing arguments if any exist, and listen to Christians in our forum if an article is lacking something important or unfairly characterizing the opposition with straw men.

Fixing flawed articles is at the discretion of all members. However, the site admins will make executive decisions on whether an article adheres to our standards or not, and we will be the final arbiters on this matter. Rarely, we will revoke memberships of repeat offenders. Sorry, but if you don't like this position then edit Wikipedia instead of Iron Chariots.

Iron Chariots Point of View

Ask any atheist what is "the atheist viewpoint" on a particular subject, and they will probably tell you that there isn't any such thing. Atheism is not a unified world view; it is a position about one single issue: disbelief in gods. Every other position is open to discussion, and atheist opinions range all over every subject. One can be an apatheist or a Raelian, and still technically be considered an atheist.

A purely atheist site would stop at the first line of the main page. (Visit The Official God FAQ for an example of a pure atheist publication.)

Iron Chariots is not a pure atheist site. Our focus is on counter-apologetics, and we assume that our audience is the type of person that is interested in the subject. It is further assumed that our editors have most of the following traits:

If atheists and secularists meeting those conditions are strongly divided on an issue, the associated article should mention this and try to provide arguments for and against each position. Acknowledging disagreement among atheists should not be treated as threatening, since we are opposed to dogma.